The author is a Forbes contributor. The opinions expressed are those of the writer.

Loading ...

Loading ...

This story appears in the {{article.article.magazine.pretty_date}} issue of {{article.article.magazine.pubName}}. Subscribe

(Image credit: Getty Images via @daylife)

It doesn't always take big spending to make the NHL playoffs. Examples from this year include the Ottawa Senators and St. Louis Blues, each of which found the postseason despite sporting some of the league's smallest payrolls. Contrast that with the Buffalo Sabres and Calgary Flames, who rank among the the league's biggest spenders but will be watching from home this year.

But, more often than not, the teams that spend more will win more throughout the NHL's 82-game season. Between 2007 and 2011, teams that ranked among the league's top ten in player costs made the playoffs 82% of the time. For teams that cracked the top five in payroll, that likelihood of reaching the postseason increased to 88%.

In fact, just three teams in that time period have missed the playoffs despite ranking among the league's five biggest spenders: the 2007 Maple Leafs, 2009 Senators and 2010 Rangers. What's more, Toronto and New York each missed the eighth playoff spot by just a single point.

Once through the door and into the party, though, anything can happen. The team with the bigger payroll won just 48% of the 75 playoff series played over the last five years. Of the 20 teams to make a conference final since 2007, just seven have ranked among the league's top five in player expenses, and several don't even come close. The Tampa Bay Lightning made the Eastern Conference Finals last season despite team payroll ranking 16th in the league, and the Canadiens made it the year before with the 14th-highest player costs.

The last five Stanley Cup champions have averaged payrolls just 6% above the average team's, and two of those teams actually kept spending below the league average (2007 Ducks and 2009 Penguins). To put that into context, consider that the Rangers spent 25% more than the league average on player costs last season.

None of this is to say that high player costs hurt a team's likelihood of winning; the Chicago Blackhawks were tied for the fourth-highest payroll in 2010 when they won the Stanley Cup. But having high player expenses is no guarantee of playoff success. So high-spending teams like the Capitals, Canucks and Flyers will have to rely on more than their checkbooks if they want to hoist more than a golf bag this spring.

Note: All player expense data are from Forbes valuations and include both salaries and bonuses.